Session Information
99 ERC SES 04 G, International Contexts in Education
Paper Session
Contribution
This project aims to identify what constitutes successful/effective departmental leadership in the eyes of both Kazakh Heads of Department (HoDs) and their followers (i.e. lecturers).
Kazakhstan was a part of the Soviet Union from 1936 to 1991. Since gaining independence, Kazakhstan has been reforming its education system continuously (e.g. Ruby et al., 2017). In the early years of independence, the educational reforms aimed at adapting the system to market-led economic needs and introducing transition mechanisms from a centralised education system to a publicly financed one (Kuzhabekova et al., 2018). Privatisation and marketisation were seen as a solution to the crisis and inefficiency of the economy and education system. Aiming to integrate into global educational processes, in 2010, Kazakhstan became the 47th signatory of the Bologna Process. Differentiated by academic programmes and scope, higher education institutions are classified into six types. They are a national research university, national higher educational institution, research university, university, academy, institute and equated to them (conservatory, higher school, college) (Law on Education, 2007 with changes and additions as of 4 July 2018). The focus of the study is only the HEIs with the status of the university since they realise a wider range of academic programmes.
It is hoped that the study will enhance understanding of middle-level Kazakhstani academic leadership practices in a highly centralised HE system that is being rapidly transformed. It has the potential to contribute to knowledge in three ways, namely:
(1) Pragmatically: to improve current practices by making current HoDs aware of what their followers think;
(2) Strategically: to improve current and future practices by using the findings (on the characteristics of effective departmental leadership) to enhance recruitment and promotion processes in Kazakhstani universities; to suggest recommendations for policy and professional development;
(3) Socio-culturally: to plant a new culture of academic leadership in Kazakhstani universities by integrating effective practices of the West and indigenous leadership actions.
Investigating the leadership of middle leaders seems to be complex and ‘not well understood’ conceptually (Clegg & McAuley, 2005:19). Therefore, HoDs being in the middle as local-leaders, undertaking various roles have to balance internal demands from their departmental colleagues and external demands from university senior management (Martensson & Roxa, 2016:250-251). One of the distinctive characteristics of HoD’s position is the development of ‘multiple, flexible identities’ derived from professional and organisational roles (Floyd, 2012:282) and being able to balance skilfully competing demands.
There has been a gradual expansion of middle or departmental leadership research in HE of different countries. However, mostly they report the leader’s own perceptions about effective leadership (Vatanartıran & Garipagaoglu, 2013; Tahir et al., 2014). The literature is also limited in terms of identifying what constitutes effective leadership from the subordinate’s/follower’s perspective (De Boer et al., 2009; Akbulut et al., 2015). Researchers investigating successful leadership practices often rely on self-reports from leaders in the form of questionnaires (Bryman, 2011).
Davis et al. (2014) argue that there is limited research on HE middle leaders in developing countries. The search also confirmed that there are not many studies on academic leaders (HoDs) in post-Soviet countries (e.g. Mercer & Pogosian, 2013; Kuzhabekova & Almukhambetova, 2017).
The main research question is:
- What constitutes successful departmental leadership in the universities of Kazakhstan?
With sub-questions as follows:
1. What leadership styles and practices do HoDs in Kazakhstani universities use?
2. Which leadership styles and practices do HoDs and lecturers think are most successful, and why?
3. What do HoDs and lecturers think are the challenges and opportunities of the role?
Method
The study is undertaken from a pragmatist worldview and employs an Explanatory Sequential Mixed Methods Design (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018). The data was gathered through questionnaires (QUAN phase) and semi-structured interviews (QUAL phase) with HoDs and lecturers. In the quantitative phase, the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Avolio & Bass, 2004) with added demographic and open-ended questions was distributed to HoDs and lecturers from different universities in more than 20 cities of Kazakhstan. The data was collected using an online survey tool Qualtrics (N=313) and traditional paper/pencil (N=680) data collection method. Overall, there were 993 usable questionnaires, however with the outliers deleted in MLQ 963 questionnaire answers were quantitative analysis. The questionnaire aimed at (1) identifying academic leadership styles and practices; and (2) choosing the head interviewees based on ‘Reputational Case Selection’ (LeCompte & Schensul, 2010). Reputational case selection is a type of criterion-based choice of research participants assuming that the chosen ones have ‘characteristics relevant to the study’ (ibid:132). Importantly, using reputational case selection can minimise ‘bias and favoritism’ of a researcher (Walker & Gleaves, 2016:68). In particular, this strategy identified the most successful/effective HoDs within the sample size and set up the possibility of attracting volunteered nominees for the semi-structured interview as participants (Phase 2). The focus of this presentation will be the findings of the quantitative strand of the study (sub-question 1). The quantitative data was analysed using SPSS to produce descriptive and correlational statistics.
Expected Outcomes
Cronbach’s Alpha is used to measure how well all MLQ items estimate a single construct by being internally consistent. Cronbach’s Alpha for the instrument (45 items set) was =0.94 which met the internal reliability requirement since the critical value for Cronbach’s alpha is 0.70 (Lavrakas, 2008). Preliminary findings suggest that transformational and transactional leadership styles are commonly practised followed by a laissez-faire leadership style. A Pearson product-moment correlation was run to determine the relationship between leadership styles and leadership outcome. There was a strong, positive correlation between transformational leadership and leadership outcome, which was statistically significant (r=0.903, n = 963, p = .000). Similarly, a positive correlation was between transactional leadership and leadership outcome (r = 0.903, n = 963, p = .000). The open-ended questions in the questionnaire show that there is no evidence in data of universities or other organisations providing a systematic preparation and development of middle-level leaders in Kazakhstan. This study also identified some unique needs, challenges and opportunities of Heads of department. By identifying instances of successful academic departmental leadership practices, it is hoped that the findings will contribute to the success of current, novice and future heads in KZ. Furthermore, the results of this study may be of interest to universities located in other member countries of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) since they have common Soviet legacies and history. In general, studies on the middle level and academic leadership are limited in the post-Soviet countries when compared with other parts of the world.
References
Akbulut, M., Seggie, F.N. and Börkan, B., 2015. Faculty member perceptions of department head leadership effectiveness at a state university in Turkey. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 18(4), pp.440-463. Avolio, B. J. and Bass, B. M., 2004. Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Manual and sampler set. 3rd ed. Redwood City, CA: Mind Garden. Bryman, A., 2011. ‘Research Methods in the study of leadership’, in Bryman, A., Collinson, DL., and Grint, K., eds., The SAGE Handbook of Leadership. London: Sage. Clegg, S. and McAuley, J., 2005. Conceptualising Middle Management in Higher Education: A multifaceted discourse. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 27(1), pp.19-34. Creswell, J. and Plano Clark, V., 2018. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 3rd ed. London: Sage. Davis, A., Van Rensburg, M.J. & Venter, P., 2014. The impact of managerialism on the strategy work of university middle managers. Studies in Higher Education: 1-13. De Boer H., Goedegebuure L. and Meek V.L., 2009. The Changing Nature of Academic Middle Management: A Framework for Analysis, in Meek V., Goedegebuure L., Santiago R., Carvalho T., eds. The Changing Dynamics of Higher Education Middle Management. Higher Education Dynamics, Springer, Dordrecht, 33, pp.229-241. Floyd, A., 2012. 'Turning Points': The Personal and Professional Circumstances That Lead Academics to Become Middle Managers. Educational Management Administration & Leadership 40(2), pp. 272-284 Kuzhabekova, A. and Almukhambetova, A., 2017. Female academic leadership in the post-Soviet context. European Educational Research Journal, 16(2–3), pp.183–199. Kuzhabekova, A., Soltanbekova, A & Almukhambetova, A (2018) Educational Flagships as Brokers in International Policy Transfer: Learning from the Experience of Kazakhstan, European Education, 50(4), 353-370. Lavrakas, P.J 2008, Encyclopedia of survey research methods, vol. 0, Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA. LeCompte, M. and Schensul, J. (2010). Designing & conducting ethnographic research: An Introduction. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press. Martensson, K. and Roxa, T. (2016) ‘Leadership at a local level – Enhancing educational development’, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 44(2), pp. 247–262. Mercer, J. and Pogosian, V., 2013. Higher education leadership in Russia: a case study of mid-level academic management at an elite State university. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 43(2), pp.184-202. Tahir, L., Abdullah,T., Ali,F. and Daud,K., 2014. Academics transformational leadership: an investigation of heads of department leadership behaviours in Malaysian public universities. Educational Studies, 40(5), pp.473-495. Vatanartıran, S. and Garipagaoglu, B. C., 2013. Why Do Department Chairs Suffer the Most in Higher Education Hierarchy? The Business Review, 21(2), pp.189-196.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.